Category Archives: Seth Rich

Seth Rich coverup Part 2, Aaron Rich requested Julian Assange testimony Judge Leon denied, Why are Assange and Ellen Ratner kept silent?, What deep state entities involved in coverup?

Seth Rich coverup Part 2, Aaron Rich requested Julian Assange testimony Judge Leon denied, Why are Assange and Ellen Ratner kept silent?, What deep state entities involved in coverup?

“Why John Brennan, Peter Strzok and DOJ Needed Julian Assange Arrested”…The Conservative Treehouse November 3, 2019

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“If This Story Gets Out, We Are Screwed”…Wikileaks: Doug Band to John Podesta

 

What Deep State entities are involved in the Seth Rich coverup and silencing of Julian Assange and Ellen Ratner?

Both Assange and Ratner know who leaked the DNC data to Wikileaks.

Further attempts to get testimony from Assange and Ratner have been made in Joel and Mary Rich v Fox News.

https://citizenwells.com/2020/08/08/seth-rich-coverup-part-1-fox-news-attacked-and-silenced-appeals-judge-quotes-lie-how-we-got-to-assange-ratner-testimony-request-attorney-clevenger-why-would-a-street-robbery-i/

This was not the first attempt to get the testimony of Julian Assange.

From Aaron Rich v Ed Butowsky, et al November 18, 2019.

“PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF A LETTER OF REQUEST

Mr. Rich has to date been unable to serve a subpoena on WikiLeaks or Mr. Assange—or even confirm an address or agent on whom to serve a subpoena on them—as the former does not have a known physical location for service of process and the latter had been under the protection of the Ecuadorian Embassy prior to his more recent incarceration in the United Kingdom. Given Mr. Rich’s repeated failed efforts to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on Mr. Assange through traditional channels, Mr. Rich hereby requests that the Court issue the Letter of Request attached to this motion, which requests judicial assistance from the United Kingdom court system in requiring Mr. Assange to appear for a deposition to respond to a limited set of questions. See Declaration of Meryl C. Governski in Support of Mr. Rich’s Motion for Issuance of a Letter of Request (hereinafter “Governski Decl.”) Ex. 1.1 Plaintiff has already submitted a separate motion requesting permission to serve a subpoena for documents on WikiLeaks via Twitter.”

“Mr. Rich first attempted to serve subpoenas on Mr. Assange in July 2018 by executing letters rogatory pursuant to the Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory and Additional Protocol (“IACAP”). Mr. Rich submitted materials to the Department of Justice regarding that request, see Governski Decl. Ex. 13, but on July 19, 2018, the Department of Justice Office of International Judicial Assistance (“OIJA”) rejected those attempts, stating it was “unable to assist” in serving a Rule 45 subpoena on Mr. Assange because “[t]he proper route for obtaining evidence located abroad is pursuant to an international judicial assistance request.” Id. Ex. 14. In April 2019, Mr. Rich’s counsel emailed Barry Pollack, who is Mr. Assange’s criminal defense counsel, to request Mr. Pollack’s assistance in serving a subpoena on Mr. Assange and/or WikiLeaks, see id. Ex. 15, but Mr. Pollack responded that he was “NOT authorized to accept service” of a subpoena to Mr. Assange, and that he does not represent WikiLeaks. Id. Ex. 16 at 2, 4. In August 2019, Mr. Rich’s counsel again contacted Mr. Pollack, explaining: It has been near[l]y three months since this email exchange. While those three months have gone by, my client and his family have been defamed by individuals who continue to claim that Mr. Assange has relevant evidence regarding Seth and Aaron Rich that the Rich family is blocking him from releasing. As you know, that is false – as our letter clearly lays out, Mr. Rich has disclaimed any privilege and asked your client to provide whatever information he or WikiLeaks may have. It is time to end this pointless harassment of the Rich family. Please advise whether you have communicated with your client regarding our message, which as you know contains more than a request to serve a subpoena. If you are unwilling to help, we ask that you direct us promptly to a legal representative of either Mr. Assange or WikiLeaks with whom we may speak so that we may address this injustice.       Id. at 1. To date, counsel for Mr. Rich has received no response.”

“Mr. Rich respectfully requests this Court exercise its authority to request assistance from the UK court system because Mr. Rich has spent more than a year unsuccessfully attempting to serve Mr. Assange, both via the IACAP process while he was living in the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK and via his personal attorney after he was taken into UK custody. Warren, 2016 WL 10749155, at *4, *6 (“It is well-established that courts have the authority to request the assistance of foreign tribunals, through letters rogatory, in order to obtain discovery” from a third-party foreign entity that the party “has been unable to secure” due to an adversary’s unresponsiveness to traditional channels); see also Governski Decl. Ex. 14 (“The proper route for obtaining evidence located abroad is pursuant to an international judicial assistance request.”)

The relief Mr. Rich requests is narrow: assistance in securing a deposition with Mr. Assange to obtain “critical,” “relevant and necessary” testimony in response to a limited set of questions. See Warren, 2016 WL 10749155, at *6 (granting request where it was limited to relevant evidence Plaintiff was unable to secure due to unresponsiveness); Evanston, 2006 WL 1652315, at *2 (permitting deposition of individual in foreign jurisdiction whose role was “critical” and whose deposition was “relevant and necessary”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1781(b)(2); see also Governski Decl. Ex. 1 (Letter of Request). Mr. Rich therefore respectfully requests that this court issue the Letter of Request to permit Mr. Rich to seek testimony critical to his case. See Warren, 2016 WL 10749155, at *4; Evanston, 2006 WL 1652315, at *2. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests issuance of the Letter of Request. Dated: November 8, 2019 ”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.91.0.pdf

From the GateWay Pundit February 11, 2020.

“Seth Rich Family AND Defendants REQUEST TESTIMONY From Julian Assange — But Podesta-Linked Judge Richard Leon REFUSES”

“Aaron Rich, the brother of Seth Rich is suing Matt Couch for his reporting on Seth who was murdered in the summer of 2016. Seth worked for the DNC at the time.

Judge Richard J. Leon, is a longtime colleague and Georgetown Law School co-lecturer with John Podesta.  He is also linked to Fusion GPS.

Matt Couch is probably going to file a motion to recuse Leon.

NOW GET THIS…
IN A BIZARRE TWIST, AARON RICH AND THE DEFENDANTS JOINTLY ASKED JUDGE LEON TO HELP ARRANGE THE DEPOSITION OF JULIAN ASSANGE IN ENGLAND.

JULIAN ASSANGE IS THE MAIN SOURCE WHO CAN TESTIFY HOW WIKILEAKS OBTAINED THE PODESTA EMAILS DURING THE 2016 ELECTION.

BUT IN A WEIRD TWIST, ACCORDING TO OUR SOURCES, JUDGE LEON ARBITRARILY REFUSED THE REQUEST — EVEN THOUGH BOTH PARTIES REQUESTED THE DEPOSITION.

This is unheard of!  It is unique in a situation where ALL PARTIES  agree that they need the testimony of a particular witness, but the judge blocks it WITHOUT EXPLANATION!”

Read more:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/02/must-read-seth-rich-family-and-defendants-request-testimony-from-julian-assange-but-podesta-linked-judge-richard-leon-refuses/

There is part of the answer.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

 

 

Seth Rich coverup Part 1, Fox News attacked and silenced, Appeals judge quotes lie, How we got to Assange Ratner testimony request, Attorney Clevenger: “why would a “street robbery” investigation need to be classified?”

Seth Rich coverup Part 1, Fox News attacked and silenced, Appeals judge quotes lie, How we got to Assange Ratner testimony request, Attorney Clevenger: “why would a “street robbery” investigation need to be classified?”

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.”…Craig Murray

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

“Re: Seth Rich, keep an eye on the National Security Division of the Justice Department. As you can see from the federal complaint, the NSD ignored a FOIA request that I filed back in 2018 for records about Seth Rich. And look at Paragraph 16, plus Exhibit 8. I think NSD is playing a bigger role in the “Russian hacking” narrative than most of us understood. By sending Seth Rich records there, it’s easier to keep things classified. So why would a “street robbery” investigation need to be classified?”…Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020

 

The official narrative of the murder of Seth Rich, his non involvement in the DNC data leaks as well as the alleged Russian collusion, never made sense to anyone paying attention, with an IQ greater than a squirrel and who wants the truth.

Fox News and a host of other non fake news sources began reporting and asking questions immediately.

The deep state and swamp responded immediately with attacks.

Pretty soon, Sean Hannity, one of the most sincere and dependable newsmen, was silent on the Seth Rich controversy.

Joel and Mary Rich, on March 13, 2018, filed a lawsuit against Fox News, Malia Zimmerman and Ed Butowsky.

“2. In July 2016, Seth Rich, a young Democratic National Committee (“DNC”)
employee, was murdered in the streets of Washington, D.C., in what authorities have stated publicly was a botched robbery. Fox News, Fox reporter Malia Zimmerman, and Fox News contributor and political operative Ed Butowsky intentionally exploited this tragedy—including through lies, misrepresentations, and half-truths—with disregard for the obvious harm that their actions would cause Joel and Mary.”

“Defendants worked with Wheeler to pursue and develop a fiction
that Seth had leaked thousands of DNC emails to WikiLeaks. And they published, republished, and publicized the sham story—which they knew would be covered again and again, and republished, here and around the world—painting Joel and Mary’s son as a criminal and a traitor to the United States.”

“22. Notwithstanding the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia had obtained the DNC emails via computer hacking, a conspiracy theory emerged among fringe political groups that Seth had leaked the DNC emails.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098.1.0.pdf

The lawsuit against Fox News was dismissed on August 3, 2018.

From Citizen Wells August 3, 2018.

“A federal judge in Manhattan dismissed a lawsuit Thursday that was brought against Fox News by the parents of Seth Rich, the young Democratic aide whose unsolved murder was turned into fodder for a lingering right-wing conspiracy theory.”

“In a related decision, Judge Daniels also dismissed a separate lawsuitbrought against Fox News, Ms. Zimmerman and Mr. Butowsky by a private detective who had played a central role in the retracted story.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2018/08/03/seth-rich-murder-lawsuits-filed-by-parents-and-rod-wheeler-dismissed-claimed-fox-news-caused-them-emotional-distress-and-engaged-in-extreme-and-outrageous-conduct/

Joel and Mary Rich immediately filed a notice of appeal.

Oral arguments were presented on February 4, 2019.

An opinion was rendered on September 13, 2019.

“Three years ago, Seth Rich was murdered during a botched robbery. He was
a 27‐year‐old staffer for the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”). Soon after
Seth’s murder, uncorroborated theories—contradicted by official U.S. intelligence reports—surfaced on the web. Seth had leaked thousands of DNC emails to WikiLeaks, the theories asserted, and that is why he had been assassinated.”

“CONCLUSION
We VACATE the District Court’s August 2, 2018, judgment granting the
Appellees’ motion to dismiss, and we REMAND the case for further proceedings
consistent with this opinion.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098.72.0.pdf

The case has been ongoing since.

6 attempts were made to subpoena Ellen Ratner.

Why is Ellen Ratner important?

From Citizen Wells July 15, 2019.

From Attorney Ty Clevenger July 15, 2019.

“Fox News news analyst Ellen Ratner relayed information from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to Texas businessman Ed Butowsky regarding Seth Rich’s role in transferring emails to Wikileaks, according to an amended lawsuit that I filed this morning on behalf of Mr. Butowsky.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2019/07/15/seth-rich-saga-butowsky-v-gottlieb-et-al-amended-complaint-fox-news-ellen-ratner-relayed-information-from-julian-assange-to-ed-butowsky-regarding-seth-rich-role-in-transferring-emails-to-wikileaks/

The Fox News legal team requests testimony from Julian Assange.

From Citizen Wells August 5, 2020.

“This Request is being made to obtain testimony from Julian Assange for use at trial in the above-captioned matter in relation to the source of the DNC emails and documents released by WikiLeaks in 2016; WikiLeaks’ response to Mr. Rich’s murder; and WikiLeaks’ communications with Mr. Rich and members of Mr. Rich’s family.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/08/05/julian-assange-testimony-requested-in-rich-v-fox-news-august-5-2020-seth-rich-involvement-in-dnc-email-and-document-leak-uk-court-per-hague-convention/

The Fox News legal team filed a Motion for extension of time to effect service or for permission to effect alternate service on Ellen Ratner August 4, 2020.

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/08/06/ellen-ratner-subpoena-saga-rich-v-butowsky-et-al-august-4-2020-seth-rich-assange-witness-motion-for-time-to-effect-service-why-are-assange-ratner-kept-away/

So that is how we got here.

The deep state swamp folks have attempted to be clever.

However, in their devious attempts to hide and obfuscate the truth, they have motivated folks in the private sector such as attorneys Ty Clevenger, Sidney Powell and the Fox legal team to rise to the occasion and reveal the truth.

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Ellen Ratner subpoena saga, Rich v Butowsky et al  August 4, 2020, Seth Rich Assange witness, Motion for time to effect service, Why are Assange & Ratner kept away?

Ellen Ratner subpoena saga, Rich v Butowsky et al  August 4, 2020, Seth Rich Assange witness, Motion for time to effect service, Why are Assange & Ratner kept away?

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.”…Craig Murray

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

 

From Citizen Wells August 5, 2020.

“From

JOEL RICH AND MARY RICH,
Plaintiffs,
v.
FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC, MALIA
ZIMMERMAN, AND ED BUTOWSKY”

“This Request is being made to obtain testimony from Julian Assange for use at trial in the above-captioned matter in relation to the source of the DNC emails and documents released by WikiLeaks in 2016; WikiLeaks’ response to Mr. Rich’s murder; and WikiLeaks’ communications with Mr. Rich and members of Mr. Rich’s family.”

https://citizenwells.com/2020/08/05/julian-assange-testimony-requested-in-rich-v-fox-news-august-5-2020-seth-rich-involvement-in-dnc-email-and-document-leak-uk-court-per-hague-convention/

From Citizen Wells May 12, 2020.

“Ellen Ratner
Six unsuccessful attempts to serve Ellen Ratner at addresses in California and New York have been made and Defendants have performed several “skip trace” searches attempting to locate Ms. Ratner.”

“Ms. Ratner remains unserved. Defendants have instructed their process server to continue attempting to locate and serve the correct Ellen Ratner. Quainton Decl. Ex. 13. However, counsel for Defendants respectfully requests that permission be given for alternative means of service, such as through social media, since it appears unlikely service will be successful on Ms. Ratner
by conventional means.”

https://citizenwells.com/2020/05/12/seth-rich-update-where-is-key-witness-ellen-ratner-six-unsuccessful-attempts-to-serve-subpoena-in-aaron-rich-v-butowsky-et-al-ratner-knows-who-leaked-dnc-docs/

 

Rich v Butowsky.

May 11, 2020.

Att 3

Exhibit Exhibit 2 – Ellen Ratner non-serve 1

Exhibit Exhibit 3 – Ellen Ratner non-serve 2

Exhibit Exhibit 4 – Ellen Ratner non-serve 3

Exhibit Exhibit 5 – Ellen Ratner non-serve 4

Exhibit Exhibit 6 – Ellen Ranter non-serve 5 and 6

Exhibit Exhibit 7 – Ratner skip trace correspondence

Exhibit Exhibit 8 – Ratner skip trace 1

Exhibit Exhibit 9 – Ratner skip trace 2

Exhibit Exhibit 10 – Email with video and photographic images of Ellen Ratner

Exhibit Exhibit 11 – Service of process on Ellen Ratner

Exhibit Exhibit 12 – Correspondence with counsel for Ellen Miles Ratner

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6346852/rich-v-butowsky/?page=2

Motion for extension of time to effect service or for permission to effect alternate service on Ellen Ratner August 4, 2020.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.224.0.pdf

 

Why are Julian Assange and Ellen Ratner being kept away from the witness stand?

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy investigated for sexual misconduct? Retired?, OIG report July 10, 2020, Seth Rich FOIA records delayed, 302s slow walked

FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy investigated for sexual misconduct? Retired?, OIG report July 10, 2020, Seth Rich FOIA records delayed, 302s slow walked

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

“I repeatedly asked U.S. Attorney John Durham and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate whether Mr. Hardy lied under oath, and in an April 22, 2020 letter Mr. Horowitz wrote that he referred my complaint to the FBI’s Inspection Division. Was Mr. Hardy forced out?”…Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020

 

Was former FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy blackmailed or otherwise distracted by a workplace love interest?

David M. Hardy was the FBI Section Chief responsible for addressing FOIA requests.

He has been replaced.

From the FBI March 19, 2020.

DECLARATION OF MICHAEL G. SEIDEL
I, Michael G. Seidel, declare as follows:
(1) I am the Assistant Section Chief of the Record/Information Dissemination Section (RIDS), Information Management Division (IMD), in Winchester, Virginia and, in the absence of RIDS Section Chief, David M. Hardy, I serve as Acting Section Chief for RIDS. I have held this position since June 26, 2016. Ijoined the FBI in September 2011, and prior to my current position, I was the Unit Chief, RIDS Litigation Support Unit from November 2012 to June 2016;
and an Assistant General Counsel, FBI Office of General Counsel, Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) Litigation Unit, from September 2011 to November 2012. In those capacities, I had management oversight or agency counsel responsibility for FBI FOIA and Privacy Act (“PA”) litigation cases nationwide. Prior to my joining the FBI, I served as a Senior Attorney, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) from September 2006 to September 2011, where among myriad legal responsibilities, I advised on FOIA/PA matters and served as agency counsel representing the DEA in FOIA/PA suits nationwide. I also served as a U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps Officer in various assignments from 1994 to September 2006 culminating in my assignment as Chief, General Litigation Branch, U.S. Army Litigation Division where I oversaw FOIA/PA litigation for the U.S. Army. I am an attorney registered in the State of Ohio and the District of Columbia.”

https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID_19_Declaration_031920.pdf

From the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) July 10, 2020.  

“INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY
Findings of Misconduct by a then Federal Bureau of Investigation Unit Chief for
Engaging in an Improper, Intimate Relationship with a Subordinate and Related Misconduct

The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated an investigation upon receipt of information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Inspection Division, alleging that a then FBI Unit Chief (UC) was engaged in an improper, intimate relationship with a subordinate, was directly involved in the subordinate’s promotion, and had favored the
subordinate for temporary duty (TDY) opportunities.

The OIG investigation substantiated the allegation that the then FBI UC was engaged in an ongoing intimate relationship with the subordinate and had failed to disclose that relationship in violation of FBI policy. The OIG investigation also found that the then FBI UC had been directly involved in the subordinate’s promotion while the relationship was ongoing and had preferred the subordinate for certain work assignments and travel opportunities, also in violation of FBI policy. The FBI UC’s conduct violated federal ethics regulations regarding
impartiality. The FBI UC retired while the OIG’s investigation was ongoing.

The OIG has completed its investigation and provided its report to the FBI for its information.
***
Unless otherwise noted, the OIG applies the preponderance of the evidence standard in determining whether Department of Justice (DOJ) personnel have committed misconduct.”

https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/20-081_0.pdf

Is the unnamed Unit Chief David M. Hardy?

From Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020.

“One more thing: A couple of weeks ago I noticed that the FBI’s FOIA letters were no longer signed by Section Chief David M. Hardy, but by Acting Section Chief Michael G. Seidel. What happened to Mr. Hardy? You may recall that Mr. Hardy filed a sworn declaration in 2018 claiming that the FBI searched its files and located no records about Seth Rich.

In September of 2019, however, Judicial Watch obtained an email string about Seth Rich in response to a FOIA request for communications between FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and in March of 2020 former U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines testified that the FBI had investigated Seth Rich’s laptop and his online accounts. In other words, Mr. Hardy’s testimony was false.

I repeatedly asked U.S. Attorney John Durham and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate whether Mr. Hardy lied under oath, and in an April 22, 2020 letter Mr. Horowitz wrote that he referred my complaint to the FBI’s Inspection Division. Was Mr. Hardy forced out? I don’t know, but if you have any inside information, please send it my way.”

Read more:

http://lawflog.com/?p=2355

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Seth Rich update Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020, Updated FOIA lawsuit, FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy gone?, Why “street robbery” investigation classified?

Seth Rich update Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020, Updated FOIA lawsuit, FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy gone?, Why “street robbery” investigation  classified?

“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.” …Attorney General Barr

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

 

From Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020.

  • “On Monday, I filed an updated Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for records about Seth Rich, the Awan family, and government surveillance of journalists.
  • Re: Seth Rich, keep an eye on the National Security Division of the Justice Department. As you can see from the federal complaint, the NSD ignored a FOIA request that I filed back in 2018 for records about Seth Rich. And look at Paragraph 16, plus Exhibit 8. I think NSD is playing a bigger role in the “Russian hacking” narrative than most of us understood. By sending Seth Rich records there, it’s easier to keep things classified. So why would a “street robbery” investigation need to be classified?
  • In the Huddleston FOIA case, the government’s response is due on August 10, 2020. Mark your calendar. By that date, the FBI will have to explain what it has done to locate and produce records about Seth Rich. And this time around, the FBI doesn’t have the luxury of denying that the records exist.”

“One more thing: A couple of weeks ago I noticed that the FBI’s FOIA letters were no longer signed by Section Chief David M. Hardy, but by Acting Section Chief Michael G. Seidel. What happened to Mr. Hardy? You may recall that Mr. Hardy filed a sworn declaration in 2018 claiming that the FBI searched its files and located no records about Seth Rich.

In September of 2019, however, Judicial Watch obtained an email string about Seth Rich in response to a FOIA request for communications between FBI lovebirds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and in March of 2020 former U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines testified that the FBI had investigated Seth Rich’s laptop and his online accounts. In other words, Mr. Hardy’s testimony was false.

I repeatedly asked U.S. Attorney John Durham and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to investigate whether Mr. Hardy lied under oath, and in an April 22, 2020 letter Mr. Horowitz wrote that he referred my complaint to the FBI’s Inspection Division. Was Mr. Hardy forced out? I don’t know, but if you have any inside information, please send it my way.”

Read more:

http://lawflog.com/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Deborah Sines former Assistant United Stated Attorney served subpoena by Attorney Eden Quainton, Aaron Rich v Butowsky et al, Expert witness Larry Johnson

Deborah Sines former Assistant United Stated Attorney served subpoena by Attorney Eden Quainton, Aaron Rich v Butowsky et al, Expert witness Larry Johnson

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

“Plaintiff’s attempt to deflect attention from his attorneys’ massive commitment of resources points to one of the central puzzles in this litigation: why are so many lawyers and their allies in the media and political establishment so committed to stamping out and branding as “lies,” “fake news,” “disinformation,” “contrived narratives,” “concocted stories” any suggesting that Seth or Aaron Rich were involved in transmitting DNC emails to Wikileaks?”…Aaron Rich v Butowsky, et al May 18, 2020

 

From Aaron Rich v Edward Butowsky, et al filed May 18, 2020.

STATUS REPORT UPDATE

“The Status Report filed by Defendants Edward Butowsky and Matthew Couch on May 11, 2020 pursuant to the order of Judge Richard J. Leon, dated April 23, 2020, Dkt. 182, is hereby updated to state that former Assistant United Stated Attorney Deborah Sines has been served with a subpoena for a deposition to be held on June 22, 2020.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.207.0.pdf

EXPERT WITNESS LARRY JOHNSON’S
REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO CROSS-MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND SANCTIONS

“In the introduction Plaintiff insists on casting himself as David to Defendant’s Goliath. This continues to be absurd. Defendant is represented in this litigation by a solo practitioner with a single (and otherwise occupied) associate. Plaintiff, on the other hand, is backed by two of the most profitable law firms in American history, with the combined firepower of two sets of partners, associates, paralegals, secretaries, word processors and tech support staff. Defendant is
truly armed with a slingshot and Plaintiff has not one but an army of javelin throwers.1

That Mr. Butowsky is also being harassed in a separate lawsuit claiming, in a wildly implausible flight of fancy, that he conspired with President Trump to intentionally target a grieving family is of course completely irrelevant. Plaintiff’s attempt to deflect attention from his attorneys’ massive commitment of resources points to one of the central puzzles in this litigation: why are so many lawyers and their allies in the media and political establishment so committed to stamping out and branding as “lies,” “fake news,” “disinformation,” “contrived
narratives,” “concocted stories” any suggesting that Seth or Aaron Rich were involved in transmitting DNC emails to Wikileaks?

The question readily answers itself: the professional, media and political elite are heavily invested in the now debunked Trump-Russia conspiracy theory and are desperate to “squash” – in the words of one of the early FBI investigators responding to alternative theories to their pet Guccifer 2.0 claim – any honest investigation of the origins of the conspiracy theory, including
the evidence-free “assessment” that Russia military intelligence hacked the DNC servers as part of a plot to support Donald Trump.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.206.0.pdf

From Citizen Wells May 14, 2020.

From the Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell dated May 7, 2020.

“I am reliably informed that the NSA or its partners intercepted at least some
of the communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks. Before elaborating on
that, however, I should first note the extent to which the “deep state” has already
tried to cover up information about Mr. Rich. In an October 9, 2018 affidavit
submitted in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, FBI section chief David M.
Hardy testified that (1) the FBI did not investigate any matters pertaining to Mr.
Rich, and (2) the FBI was unable to locate any records about Mr. Rich. Both
claims were unequivocally false.”

“On March 20, 2020, I deposed former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines,
the prosecutor assigned to the Seth Rich murder case. She testified that (1) the FBI investigated a possible intrusion into Mr. Rich’s electronic accounts; (2) the FBI examined Mr. Rich’s computer; and (3) the FBI did have records pertaining to Mr. Rich. Ms. Sines further testified that she met with a prosecutor and an FBI agent from Mr. Mueller’s team (ergo there should be an FD-302 form from that
interview). Again, this flatly contradicts the FBI’s official narrative that (1) Mr.
Rich was never the subject.””

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/05/14/seth-rich-conclusive-proof-of-wikileaks-contact-imminent-attorney-ty-clevenger-letter-to-odni-director-richard-grenell-clevenger-v-usdoj/

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Seth Rich conclusive proof of Wikileaks contact imminent, Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell, Clevenger v USDOJ

Seth Rich conclusive proof of Wikileaks contact imminent, Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell, Clevenger v USDOJ

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

“Where is Ellen Ratner, key witness in the Seth Rich Wikileaks controversy?”...Citizen Wells

 

From the Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell dated May 7, 2020.

“I represent Ed Butowsky in the cases identified above, each of which
concerns an overlapping question of fact, namely whether former Democratic
National Committee employee Seth Rich played a role in leaking emails from the
DNC to Wikileaks in 2016. I respectfully request your assistance in de-classifying
National Security Agency records that would settle this question once and for all.

As you are probably aware, Mr. Rich was murdered in Washington, D.C.
shortly after the emails were released, and Julian Assange strongly inferred that
Mr. Rich – rather than Russian hackers – was responsible for sending the emails to Wikileaks. Conversely, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the FBI, and the
intelligence establishment all have insisted that Mr. Rich played no role in
transferring the emails.

I am reliably informed that the NSA or its partners intercepted at least some
of the communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks. Before elaborating on
that, however, I should first note the extent to which the “deep state” has already
tried to cover up information about Mr. Rich. In an October 9, 2018 affidavit
submitted in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, FBI section chief David M.
Hardy testified that (1) the FBI did not investigate any matters pertaining to Mr.
Rich, and (2) the FBI was unable to locate any records about Mr. Rich. Both
claims were unequivocally false.”

“On March 20, 2020, I deposed former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines,
the prosecutor assigned to the Seth Rich murder case. She testified that (1) the FBI investigated a possible intrusion into Mr. Rich’s electronic accounts; (2) the FBI examined Mr. Rich’s computer; and (3) the FBI did have records pertaining to Mr. Rich. Ms. Sines further testified that she met with a prosecutor and an FBI agent from Mr. Mueller’s team (ergo there should be an FD-302 form from that
interview). Again, this flatly contradicts the FBI’s official narrative that (1) Mr.
Rich was never the subject.”

Now, back to the NSA. Former NSA officials Bill Binney, Ed Loomis, and
Kirk Wiebe are prepared to testify that the DNC emails published by Wikileaks
could not have been obtained via hacking. Markings on the published emails –
including the speeds at which the email files were transmitted – exclude the
possibility of hacking. Instead, someone must have downloaded the files onto a
thumb drive or something similar. Furthermore, the NSA or its Five Eyes partners in London would have intercepted any communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks.

I have enclosed an October 4, 2018 letter wherein the NSA refused to
produce 32 pages of records about Seth Rich insofar as those records were
classified. I have also enclosed a November 22, 2019 letter wherein the NSA
declined to produce records in response to a subpoena duces tecum. One of my
consulting experts, Larry C. Johnson, was informed that the NSA possesses
additional communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks. Mr. Johnson is
retired from the CIA, and he has spoken with an intelligence official who said
there were additional communications.

Section 1.7 of Executive Order 13526 prohibits the use of classification for
purposes of concealing wrongdoing, and I believe the NSA is trying to conceal
wrongdoing that occurred during the Obama Administration. I respectfully request that you de-classify the NSA’s records about Seth Rich, further directing the NSA to release the records. Releasing the records would certainly help my client, but it would do a lot more than that. Disclosure would go a long way toward exposing the depravity of the “deep state,” and that is long overdue.”

Read more:

https://www.scribd.com/document/460698548/Letter-from-Attorney-Ty-Clevenger-to-Acting-DNI-Richard-Grenell#from_embed

From Clevenger v US Department of Justice filed May 1, 2020 by Attorney Ty Clevenger.

“In his March 29, 2020 Notice (Doc. No. 57), the Plaintiff informed the Court about the March 20, 2020 deposition of former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines, and he further told the Court that he would provide a copy of Ms. Sines’s testimony after it became available. The Order was released on April 3, 2020, before the Plaintiff filed the transcript, but he has attached as Exhibit 1 to this motion a true and correct transcript of Ms. Sines’s testimony (hereinafter
“Transcript”).1 The Plaintiff respectfully moves the Court to reconsider the Order, particularly pages 15-19, in light of Ms. Sines’s testimony. Even without her testimony, however, the Plaintiff can establish that the government was not entitled to summary judgment.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614.60.0.pdf

An order was filed yesterday May 13, 2020.

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/


							

Seth Rich update, Where is key witness Ellen Ratner?, Six unsuccessful attempts to serve subpoena in Aaron Rich v Butowsky et al, Ratner knows who leaked DNC docs

Seth Rich update, Where is key witness Ellen Ratner?, Six unsuccessful attempts to serve subpoena in Aaron Rich v Butowsky et al, Ratner knows who leaked DNC docs

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.”…Craig Murray

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

 

Multiple witnesses for the Aaron Rich v ED Butowsky, et al lawsuit have attempted to be served.

Sy Hersh has been served for a June 15 deposition.

But where is Ellen Ratner, whose brother had been an attorney for and who met with Julian Assange?

From Aaron Rich v ED Butowsky, et al  May 11, 2020.

STATUS REPORT
Pursuant to the order of Judge Richard J. Leon, dated April 23, 2020, Dkt. 182 (the “Order”), Defendants Edward Butowsky and Matthew Couch provide the following status reporton the service of additional subpoenas authorized pursuant to the Order.

Sy Hersh
Sy Hersh had been previously served but the date for the deposition has passed. A subpoena directing Sy Hersh to appear for a deposition on June 15, 2020 has been served as set forth on Ex. 1 to the Declaration of Eden P. Quainton, dated May 11, 2020 (the “Quainton Decl.”).

Ellen Ratner
Six unsuccessful attempts to serve Ellen Ratner at addresses in California and New York have been made and Defendants have performed several “skip trace” searches attempting to locate Ms. Ratner.”

“Ms. Ratner remains unserved. Defendants have instructed their process server to continue attempting to locate and serve the correct Ellen Ratner. Quainton Decl. Ex. 13. However, counsel for Defendants respectfully requests that permission be given for alternative means of service, such as through social media, since it appears unlikely service will be successful on Ms. Ratner
by conventional means.”

“Metropolitan Police Department (the “MPD”)
Defendants had previously unsuccessfully attempted to serve the MPD. Dkt. 183 at 19. Defendant Butowsky reissued a subpoena and unsuccessfully attempted service. Quainton Decl. Ex. 14. He was directed to effect service by certified mail, which Defendant has authorized. Id.; Quainton Decl. Ex. 15. As of today, the MPD remains unserved. Counsel does not yet have confirmation that the MPD has received and is accepting service of the subpoena sent by certified mail.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.200.0.pdf

“From Citizen Wells November 12, 2019.

The facts and why Julian Assange is the key witness in the DNC leak and disproving a Russian hack:

  1. Julian Assange, in a January 4, 2017 CNN video states: “Our source is not the Russian Government”
  2. Fox News analyst Ellen Ratner, representing the left, at a Embry University symposium on November 9, 2016: “Ellen Ratner can confirm that the Saturday before the Election 2016, she met with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange for 3 hours. He told her that Russia did not “hack” the DNC, it was from an internal source.”
  3.  Rep. Rohrabacher, in a August 2017 interview with John Solomon of the The Hill, stated: “Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”
  4. Attorney Ty Clevenger: “Fox News news analyst Ellen Ratner relayed information from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to Texas businessman Ed Butowsky regarding Seth Rich’s role in transferring emails to Wikileaks, according to an amended lawsuit that I filed this morning on behalf of Mr. Butowsky.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2019/11/12/julian-assange-key-witness-why-barr-should-protect-why-brennan-strzok-and-doj-needed-assange-arrested-ellen-ratner-and-rep-rohrabacher-confirmed/

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deborah Sines Seth Rich investigation deposition released April 3, 2020, Consulted with FBI and DC police, Rich laptop examined, Transcript link

Deborah Sines Seth Rich investigation deposition released April 3, 2020, Consulted with FBI and DC police, Rich laptop examined, Transcript link

And I’ve now found a witness who says the original 302 did in fact say that Flynn was honest with the agents.”...Attorney Sidney Powell

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

 

From The Gateway Pundit April 3, 2020.

“Former DOJ Assistant US Attorney Admits FBI Examined Seth Rich’s Computer and She Met with FBI and Mueller Gang But No 302 Has Been Provided to Date

More evidence confirms more FBI and Mueller gang lies and cover ups.  This time a Deep State Anti-Trump former Assistant US Attorney claimed under oath that the FBI did examine Seth Rich’s computer and that she met with an FBI Agent and prosecutor from the Mueller gang.  This indicates the meeting should have been recorded in a form 302 but the FBI continues to claim no records related to Seth Rich are available!

Previously we reported that after getting caught lying to the Courts and claiming there were no documents related to Seth Rich, emails between FBI Deep State lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were uncovered by Judicial Watch with the title “Seth Rich” .

Attorney Ty Clevenger uncovered that the former Assistant US Attorney related to the case admitted that Rich’s computer was inspected by the FBI and that there would be records related to this investigation.  She now has been deposed and her comments are shocking, indicating she met with both the FBI and the Mueller gang!

Earlier this week Clevenger filed his request again asking for all information related to the Seth Rich case. This was based on recent testimony from former Assistant US Attorney Deborah Sines:”

Read more:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/breaking-exclusive-former-doj-assistant-us-attorney-admits-fbi-examined-seth-richs-computer-met-fbi-mueller-gang-no-302-provided-date/

From the transcript:

“Q. If you would turn to page 49 of that
5 Episode 6 transcript. On — on that page Mr. Isikoff
6 says: MPD or Metropolitan Police Department examined
7 and reexamined Seth’s laptop.
8 Is that something that you told Mr. Isikoff?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. And to your — to your knowledge, that is a
11 true statement?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did the MPD have any assistance from other
14 agencies in examining the laptop?
15 A. I was not authorized to say what MPD did. I
16 should not have said that. That is the law enforcement
17 privilege. It’s an open case. I’m not allowed to
18 answer anything else other than did I say it and was it
19 true. I was not authorized to say that.
20 Q. Do you know whether Aaron Rich disclosed all
21 of his brother’s e-mail accounts during the
22 investigation?
23 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
24 Q. On page 54 of the transcript, it quotes you
25 as saying that there was more than one person that was

1 involved, a gunman and someone who aided and abetted?
2 A. Let me just —
3 Q. Did you make that statement?
4 A. What — what page is that?
5 Q. Okay. 54.
6 A. I’m just looking to see where I’m talking.
7 Wait a minute. Can you give me a line, Counsel?
8 Q. Actually, I don’t have it in front of me.
9 Let me pull it up. Just a second.
10 A. I’ve got it. I see it.
11 Q. Okay. Was that —
12 A. Hold on.
13 Q. Is that —
14 A. Let — let me read it.
15 Q. Sure.
16 A. I said it. That’s the truth.
17 Q. Okay. Can you say why you believe it was
18 more than one person?
19 A. I wish I could. From my investigation. From
20 the evidence.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. I really do wish I could answer your
23 question.
24 Q. I understand. You said in the interview that
25 you had to track down every lead. Did you or anyone

1 from your investigative team attempt to contact
2 WikiLeaks?
3 A. Oh, I’m not allowed to answer that.
4 Q. And I understand you may not be able to
5 answer these, but I — I have to get them on the record.
6 A. I understand. I understand.
7 Q. Did you or anyone from your team attempt to
8 interview or contact Julian Assange?
9 A. I’m not permitted to answer that either.
10 Q. What about Kim Dotcom?
11 A. I’m not allowed to answer that either.
12 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Aaron
13 Rich’s bank accounts?
14 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
15 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Seth Rich’s
16 bank accounts?
17 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
18 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Aaron or
19 Seth Rich’s PayPal or eBay accounts?
20 A. I’m not allowed to answer that. That’s all
21 grand jury.
22 Q. I understand.
23 A. I know.
24 Q. Again, I’m just putting this on the record.
25 A. I understand.”

https://www.scribd.com/document/454800604/Testimony-by-former-Assistant-US-Attorney-Deborah-Sines-in-Ed-Butowsky-vs-David-Fokenflik?campaign=VigLink&ad_group=xxc1xx&source=hp_affiliate&medium=affiliate

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/